ssible for you to tell
the church schoolmaster or the clergyman that he must not in the
school explain any passage of scripture in a sense to which any of
the parents of the children, or at least any sect objects; for
_then you would in principle entirely alter the character of the
religious teaching for the rest of the scholars, and in fact upset
the whole system_. The dissenter, on the other hand, ought (in my
opinion) to be entitled to withdraw his child from the risk (if he
considers it such) of receiving instruction of the kind I
describe.

Mr. Gladstone had therefore held a consistent course, and in cherishing
along with full freedom of conscience the integrity of religious
instruction, he had followed a definite and intelligible line. Unluckily
for him and his government this was not the line now adopted.

II

When the cabinet met in the autumn of 1869, Mr. Gladstone wrote to Lord de
Grey (afterwards Ripon) (Nov. 4):--

I have read Mr. Forster's able paper, and I follow it very
generally. On one point I cannot very well follow it.... Why not
adopt frankly the principle that the State or the local community
should provide the secular teaching, and either leave the option
to the ratepayers to go beyond this _sine qua non_, if they think
fit, within the limits of the conscience clause, or else simply
leave the parties themselves to find Bible and other religious
education from voluntary sources?

Early in the session before the introduction of the bill, Mr. Gladstone
noted in his diary, "Good hope that the principal matters at issue may be
accommodated during the session, but great differences of opinion have
come to the surface, and much trouble may arise." In fact trouble enough
arose to shake his ministry to its foundations. What would be curious if
he had not had the Land bill on his hands, is that he did not fight hard
for his own view in the cabinet. He seems to have been content with
stating it, without insisting. Whether he could have carried it in the
midst of a whirlwind of indeterminate but vehement opinions, may well be
doubted.

(M93) The Education bill was worked through the cabinet by Lord de Grey as
president of the council, but its lines were laid and its provisions in
their varying forms defended in parliament, by the vice-president, who did
not reach the cabinet until July 1870. Mr. Forster was a man of sterling